Introduction to the content below as it appears in the Spanish edition of «Essays on Rational Astrology. Handbook for Consultation and Students» (2019. Editorial Solar. Bogotá D.C.), by David Bustamante Segovia. Translated from the Spanish language by the author: “From the different forms of search for the philosophical truth under an unequivocal and affable integrity of Socratic maieutics, education based upon comparisons has always constituted a pedagogical method utmost productive and effective, reason for which we hereby appeal to comparative dialectical relationships (thesis-antithesis) to explain the planetary behaviour that tends to be prompted by the zodiac signs, as in previous reviews, this time with Taurus and Scorpio, complementary signs.”

*       *       *

“While Taurus aspires to experience the physical world through its palate and touch, Scorpio through its molecular and atomic scrutiny. While Taurus transforms the raw material it works with to produce a piece of furniture or some craft or sculpture (including currency), Scorpio manipulates it and breaks it down in order to explain the mechanism of action through which that and other manipulations are possible. While Taurus treats the patient with botanical remedies and affection, Scorpio with drugs and psychoanalysis. While Taurus remains on the surface — to which it clings like one who seeks the warmth of the sun on the sand — Scorpio focuses mentally until he succeeds in penetrating the subsoil and extracting thereby the crude product of the organic matter of the geological past. The latter assumes, then, the role of Virgo among the water signs (as much as Virgo the role of Scorpio among the earth signs). Taurus, for its part, assumes the role of Leo among the earth signs (as much as Leo the role of Taurus among the fire signs). What do Virgo and Scorpio have in common? Their analytical orientation (bordering on obsessive-compulsive in the case of Scorpio). What do Taurus and Leo have in common? Their connotations of magnanimous and jovial, creative and artistic, wealthy and fortunate, noble and happy, loving and fruitful.”

*       *       *

Note. The reader is to be made aware of the fact that this has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with ‘being’ or not ‘being’ Taurus or Scorpio, for there is no such thing as ‘being’ a sign. A sign is a sign, not a person, much less a population, for it would be the same as stating that one can make a review of a particular person or group of people by their eye colour. We are made up of all signs (i.e. we are all born on Earth). The dosage of each is dependent upon the natal composition (i.e. hour, minutes, seconds; day, month, year; city, country).